DOCSLIB.ORG

The Dynamics and Determinants of Bullying Victimisation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Dynamics and Determinants of Bullying Victimisation DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES IZA DP No. 11902 The Dynamics and Determinants of Bullying Victimisation Georgios Marios Chrysanthou Chrysovalantis Vasilakis OCTOBER 2018 DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES IZA DP No. 11902 The Dynamics and Determinants of Bullying Victimisation Georgios Marios Chrysanthou University of Sheffield Chrysovalantis Vasilakis Bangor Business School, Université Catholique de Louvain, IRES and IZA OCTOBER 2018 Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and not those of IZA. Research published in this series may include views on policy, but IZA takes no institutional policy positions. The IZA research network is committed to the IZA Guiding Principles of Research Integrity. The IZA Institute of Labor Economics is an independent economic research institute that conducts research in labor economics and offers evidence-based policy advice on labor market issues. Supported by the Deutsche Post Foundation, IZA runs the world’s largest network of economists, whose research aims to provide answers to the global labor market challenges of our time. Our key objective is to build bridges between academic research, policymakers and society. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author. IZA – Institute of Labor Economics Schaumburg-Lippe-Straße 5–9 Phone: +49-228-3894-0 53113 Bonn, Germany Email: [email protected] www.iza.org IZA DP No. 11902 OCTOBER 2018 ABSTRACT The Dynamics and Determinants of Bullying Victimisation* We study the determinants and longitudinal evolution of nine types of adolescent (verbal, physical, indirect) bullying at school and domestically using the Understanding Society dataset during 2009-13. Family support is the most prominent protective factor against bullying. Applying joint maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) for dynamic discrete responses, we investigate potential simultaneous determination of bullying and family support. The estimates indicate that bullying disclosure might be uncommon. The probability of escaping/suffering victimisation is inversely/positively related to previous bullying intensity, respectively. Family income increases domestic indirect aggression but, reduces direct aggression and non-domestic bullying as does living in a high income region. JEL Classification: C25, C35, J12, J13 Keywords: bullying, dynamic discrete response, simultaneity, unobserved heterogeneity Corresponding author: Chrysovalantis Vasilakis Bangor Business School Bangor University College Road Bangor, LL57 2DG United Kingdom E-mail: [email protected] * The views presented in this paper are the authors’ and do not reflect those of the Understanding Society data depositors, namely, the Institute for Social and Economic Research at the University of Essex, U.K. We thank participants at the 2018 International Association for Applied Econometrics (IAAE) Annual Conference and, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) seminar. Georgios Marios Chrysanthou gratefully acknowledges partial financial support from the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad and the Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional through the grants ECO2013-43119-P, ECO2015-70540-P, ECO2016-77200-P (MINECO/FEDER) and the University of Alicante through the grant GRE13- 04. 1 Introduction Preadolescence and adolescence are critical developmental periods regarding the formation of adult skills and human capital (Heckman, 2006; Van den Berg et al. 2014). Meanwhile, bullying is a widespread phenomenon adversely affecting human capital and socioeconomic outcomes over the life course. Bullying is an anti-social behaviour encompassing physical aggression, threats, teasing, and harassment (Olweus, 1993). Environmental influences such as the house- hold, school, peer groups and the media are important determinants of bullying incidence. Adolescent maltreatment impacts on internalising mental health disorders leading to symp- toms of withdrawal and depression (Vaillancourt et al., 2011; McDougall and Vaillancourt, 2015), as well as, externalising disorders such as aggression and delinquency (e.g. Currie and Tekin, 2012; Reijntjes et al., 2011). Crucially, bullying victimisation can impair cognitive abili- ties conducing to future reductions in productivity and wages (Brown and Taylor, 2008; Vartia, 2001; Kivimaki et al., 2003; Kaestner and Callison, 2011).1 We investigate the socioeconomic determinants of adolescent bullying victimisation. We find that the most effective protective factor is family support while economic disadvantage (low family income/regional income per capita) is a significant risk factor. Our analysis combines three distinctive features. First, employing the youth self-completion questionnaire (preadolescents/adolescents aged 10-15 years) from the Understanding Society (UK Household Longitudinal Study, UKHLS), we study the evolution of different types of bul- lying at the school and household levels during 2009-2013. Initially, we investigate the socioe- conomic determinants of adolescent victimisation using a general bullying measure. We then analyse the probability of victimisation at the school and household levels using aggregate measures of maltreatment. Further, we consider direct forms of aggression (physical, verbal) and other indirect forms of bullying at the school and household levels.2 1Bullying during adulthood can also have detrimental effects. For instance, Eriksen et al. (2016) find that work- place bullying negatively affects self-assessed health. 2The first half of the age range analysed corresponds to preadolescence and the other half to adolescence though this is only an approximate outline of young developmental periods and varies across individuals. Slightly abusing Second, we employ dynamic ordered correlated random effects estimation controlling for initial conditions, as well as, fixed effects estimation incorporating threshold-specific hetero- geneity to account for unobserved personality characteristics affecting individual assessments of bullying victimisation occurrence and intensity. Third, to investigate whether bullying victimisation and family support are simultaneously determined, we perform joint maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) of dynamic discrete re- sponse random effects models. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to extend existing cross-sectional joint MLE procedures (e.g. Miranda and Rabe-Hesketh, 2006) to the longitudi- nal case. The present study contributes to a sizeable interdisciplinary literature. Studies such as Erik- sen et al. (2014), Brown and Taylor (2008) and McDougall and Vaillancourt (2015) focus on school bullying and adverse consequences on human capital formation. Henningsen (2009) and Eriksen et al. (2014) identify family safety and the quality of the home environment as significant predictors of bullying victimisation, respectively. We conclude that the principal factor reducing all forms of bullying incidence is the strength of family support as felt by the child (henceforth referred to as perceived family support). Since family support could be increased in the advent of bullying incidence, we undertake simulta- neous estimation of the two outcomes. Simultaneous estimation of the determinants of bully- ing victimisation and perceived family support reveals that the latent factors determining the two outcomes are unrelated. This suggests that adolescents might not frequently talk to their families about victimisation experiences. Further, the exogeneity of perceived family support implies that what forms a significant deterrent of bullying victimisation is the provision of con- sistent and persistent family support across time and not the mere modification in the advent of a victimisation event. The number of close friends and social website membership also act as protective factors particularly against non-domestic peer victimisation (see Hodges et al., 1999; Martin and Hueb- the terminology, for succinctness we henceforth refer to our analysis as an adolescent victimisation study. ner, 2007 for similar conclusions). The significant correlation between the unobserved individual heterogeneity and initial conditions, in the cases of aggregate school bullying/physical home and other school bullying, indicates that some adolescents have a higher predisposition towards continuing victimisation. However, this could be due to unobserved characteristics such as physical appearance that we fail to incorporate in our analysis. Bullying displays significant persistence across time with previous period victims being at a higher risk compared to their unexposed counterparts. The impact of past bullying is greater in the case of high incidence compared to intermediate in- cidence victimisation. This is an alarming result indicating the inability of frequently bullied adolescents to escape victimisation. Family income reduces non-domestic bullying occurrence and direct domestic aggression which is in agreement with studies such as Henningsen (2009), Eriksen et al. (2014) and Doidge et al. (2017). However, family income increases domestic indirect aggression possibly due to neglectful parenting. Further, residing in the wealthiest English regions in terms of GVA per capita (London, S.East, S.West, and East England) generally reduces the probability of non- domestic bullying particularly at the school level. Boys are more likely to be exposed to physi-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Joking, Teasing Or Bullying? • a Kid Who Isn’T Very Nice to You Trips You in the Hall for the Third Time This Week
    LESSON 2 It Takes One Unit Joking, Teasing Grade 2 • Ages 7-8 TIME FRAME or Bullying? Preparation: 15 minutes Instruction: 30-60 minutes Students will distinguish the difference MATERIALS between joking, teasing and bullying and Large white poster sheet divided understand how joking, teasing and bullying into three columns with the following headings: Joking, Teasing, Bullying can strengthen or weaken relationships. Create three signs, one that says “JOKING”, another that Lesson Background for Teachers says, “TEASING”, third that says “BULLYING”; post on different walls This lesson builds on previous lessons in this unit. before class For more information on bullying visit PrevNet, an anti-bullying organization that RAK journals provides research, information and resources. www.prevnet.ca Kindness Concept Posters for Assertiveness, Respect Key Terms for Students LEARNING STANDARDS Consider writing key terms on the board before class to introduce vocabulary and increase understanding. Common Core: CCSS.ELA-Literacy. SL.2.1, 1a-c, 2, 3 Colorado: Compre- JOKING To say funny things or play tricks on people to make them hensive Health S.4, GLE.3, EO.a-c; laugh. Joking is between friends, makes all people laugh, Reading, Writing and Communicating isn’t meant to be mean, cruel or unkind, doesn’t make S.1, GLE.1, EO.b-f; S.1, GLE.2, EO.a-c people feel bad and stops before someone gets upset. Learning standards key TEASING Teasing doesn’t happen often. It means to make fun of someone by playfully saying unkind and hurtful things to the person; it can be friendly, but can turn unkind quickly.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Invisibility of Girl-To-Girl Bullying in Schools: a Call to Action
    Examining the Invisibility of Girl-to-Girl Bullying in Schools: A Call to Action Suzanne SooHoo It does not matter whether one is 13, 33, or 53 years old, but if you are female, chances are that other girls have bullied you sometime in your lifetime. Bullying is not the kind of abuse that leaves broken bones; rather, it is a dehumanizing experience that manifests itself in the form of rumor spreading, name calling, psychological manipulation, character assassination, and social exclusion. Female teachers who are former victims of girl bullies or who themselves have been complicit with girl-to-girl bullying, consistently casting a blind eye to this ritualized social degradation, allowing it to continue generation after generation. The purpose here is not to blame teachers, but rather to seek an answer to "What are the social or institutional forces that prevent adults in the schools from seeing what they may have experienced themselves?" Throughout generations, girls have been bullied. The dehumanizing rituals and practices, passed on from mother to daughter, have survived even when the victims have not. Damaged young girls become damaged adult women. Mothers who did not know what to do when they were girls still do not know how to handle girl-to-girl bullying as women (Simmons, 2002). Many are unable to intervene when their daughters are bullied and they continue to be victims of adult female bullies. Through the process of "othering" (SooHoo, 2006), girl bullies determine who is valued and who is not and, as such, girl-to-girl bullying contributes to a social hierarchy of privilege and oppression.
    [Show full text]
  • Bullying and Victimisation in Schools: a Restorative Justice Approach
    A U S T R A L I A N I N S T I T U T E O F C R I M I N O L O G Y t r e n d s No. 219 & Bullying and Victimisation i s s u e s in Schools: A Restorative Justice Approach in crime and criminal justice Brenda Morrison Bullying at school causes enormous stress for many children and their families, and has long-term effects. School bullying has been identified as a risk factor associated with antisocial and criminal behaviour. Bullies are more likely to drop out of school and to engage in delinquent and criminal behaviour. The victims are more likely to have higher levels of stress, anxiety, depression and illness, and an increased tendency to suicide. This paper reports on a restorative justice program that was run in a primary school in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), but whose lessons have wider application. Early intervention has been advocated as the most appropriate way to prevent bullying. This paper outlines a framework based on restorative justice principles aimed at bringing about behavioural change for the individual while keeping schools and communities safe. The aim of restorative programs is to reintegrate those affected by wrongdoing back into the community as resilient and responsible members. Restorative justice is a form of conflict resolution and seeks to make it clear to the offender that the behaviour is not condoned, at February 2002 the same time as being supportive and respectful of the individual. The paper highlights the importance of schools as institutions that can foster care and respect and provide opportunities to participate in processes ISSN 0817-8542 that allow for differences to be worked through constructively.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Mobbing in the Workplace and an Overview of Adult Bullying
    1: Introduction to Mobbing in the Workplace and an Overview of Adult Bullying Workplace Bullying Clinical and Organizational Perspectives In the early 1980s, German industrial psychologist Heinz Leymann began work in Sweden, conducting studies of workers who had experienced violence on the job. Leymann’s research originally consisted of longitudinal studies of subway drivers who had accidentally run over people with their trains and of banking employees who had been robbed on the job. In the course of his research, Leymann discovered a surprising syndrome in a group that had the most severe symptoms of acute stress disorder (ASD), workers whose colleagues had ganged up on them in the workplace (Gravois, 2006). Investigating this further, Leymann studied workers in one of the major Swedish iron and steel plants. From this early work, Leymann used the term “mobbing” to refer to emotional abuse at work by one or more others. Earlier theorists such as Austrian ethnologist Konrad Lorenz and Swedish physician Peter-Paul Heinemann used the term before Leymann, but Leymann received the most recognition for it. Lorenz used “mobbing” to describe animal group behavior, such as attacks by a group of smaller animals on a single larger animal (Lorenz, 1991, in Zapf & Leymann, 1996). Heinemann borrowed this term and used it to describe the destructive behavior of children, often in a group, against a single child. This text uses the terms “mobbing” and “bullying” interchangeably; however, mobbing more often refers to bullying by more than one person and can be more subtle. Bullying more often focuses on the actions of a single person.
    [Show full text]
  • Institutional Betrayal and Gaslighting Why Whistle-Blowers Are So Traumatized
    DOI: 10.1097/JPN.0000000000000306 Continuing Education r r J Perinat Neonat Nurs Volume 32 Number 1, 59–65 Copyright C 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Institutional Betrayal and Gaslighting Why Whistle-Blowers Are So Traumatized Kathy Ahern, PhD, RN ABSTRACT marginalization. As a result of these reprisals, whistle- Despite whistle-blower protection legislation and blowers often experience severe emotional trauma that healthcare codes of conduct, retaliation against nurses seems out of proportion to “normal” reactions to work- who report misconduct is common, as are outcomes place bullying. The purpose of this article is to ap- of sadness, anxiety, and a pervasive loss of sense ply the research literature to explain the psychological of worth in the whistle-blower. Literature in the field processes involved in whistle-blower reprisals, which of institutional betrayal and intimate partner violence result in severe emotional trauma to whistle-blowers. describes processes of abuse strikingly similar to those “Whistle-blower gaslighting” is the term that most ac- experienced by whistle-blowers. The literature supports the curately describes the processes mirroring the psycho- argument that although whistle-blowers suffer reprisals, logical abuse that commonly occurs in intimate partner they are traumatized by the emotional manipulation many violence. employers routinely use to discredit and punish employees who report misconduct. “Whistle-blower gaslighting” creates a situation where the whistle-blower doubts BACKGROUND her perceptions, competence, and mental state. These On a YouTube clip,1 a game is described in which a outcomes are accomplished when the institution enables woman is given a map of house to memorize.
    [Show full text]
  • BOT Report 09-Nov-20.Docx
    REPORT 9 OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES (November 2020) Bullying in the Practice of Medicine (Reference Committee D) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the 2019 Annual Meeting Resolution 402-A-19, “Bullying in the Practice of Medicine,” was introduced by the Young Physicians Section and referred by the House of Delegates (HOD) for report back at the 2020 Annual Meeting. The resolution asks the American Medical Association (AMA) to help (1) establish a clear definition of professional bullying, (2) establish prevalence and impact of professional bullying, and (3) establish guidelines for prevention of professional bullying. This report provides statistics and other information about the prevalence and impact of professional bullying in the practice of medicine, and makes recommendations for the adoption of a formal definition and guidelines for establishing policies and strategies for preventing and addressing incidents of bullying among the health care staff. Bullying in the practice of medicine for physicians can begin in medical school and can endure throughout a physician’s career. Bullying is not limited to physicians and can happen among other members of the health care team. Bullying has many definitions, all commonly referring to the repeated abuse of a target by a perpetrator in a work setting. Bullying occurs at different levels within the practice of medicine, and affects the victim as well as their patients, care teams, organizations, and families. Nationally recognized organizations have established guidelines on which health care employers can base their internal policies, and many organizations have implemented anti-bullying or anti-violence policies. Bullying in medicine needs to be stopped and prevented for the sake of patients and care quality, the well- being of the physician workforce, and the integrity of the medical profession.
    [Show full text]
  • Bullying: the Big Picture
    Bullying: The Big Picture 2 What is bullying? Bullying is when one or more students tease, threaten, spread rumors about, hit, shove, or hurt another student over and over again. It is not bullying when two students of about the same strength or power argue or fight or tease each other in a friendly way. R.I.P. (repeated, intentional, power imbalance) 3 Who are the bullies and who are the victims? Anyone can engage in bullying behavior. Anyone can be the victim of bullying. Categories of students who are more vulnerable : Students who look or act different LGBTQ Students with disabilities Students with social skill deficits 4 Bully/Victim Continuum Bully –reports bullying others (17%) Victim –reports being bullied by others (15%) Bully‐Victim –reports bullying others & being bullied (8%) Bystander –reports observing others being bullied (60%) Only 13% intervene to help victim (Espelage & Swearer, 2003) 5 What does FL data say? “Students reported to have been bullied (for any reason or no specified reason)” 2010‐2011 Incidents of UBL or UHR –2,389 2010‐2011 Incidents – BUL –747 HAR –249 SXH –260 TRE –787 6 Impact of Bullying on Students Decreased academic achievement Feelings of alienation/disengagement with school Absenteeism & truancy Mental health and physical health problems problems ( e.g. anxiety, depression, post‐traumatic stress, headaches, stomachaches, loss of appetite) Substance abuse and delinquency Suicide 7 Hidden Problem? IES Report ‐ What characteristics of bullying, bullying victims, and schools are associated with increased reporting of bullying to school officials? (REL 2010‐No. 092) Survey of 5,621 12‐18 year olds in 2007 Survey found that 36% of bullying victims indicated that victimization was reported to an adult at their school and 64% did not report.
    [Show full text]
  • Pranks, Hazing, and Bullying
    Related Policies: Pranks, Hazing, and Bullying This policy is for internal use only and does not enlarge an employee’s civil liability in any way. The policy should not be construed as creating a duty to act or a higher duty of care with respect to third party civil claims against employees. A violation of this policy, if proven, can only form the basis of a complaint by this department for non- judicial administrative action in accordance with the laws governing employee discipline. Applicable State Statutes: OSHA: NFPA Standard: Date Implemented: Review Date: Policy: The fire department has a zero tolerance policy toward workplace and work related hazing or bullying. Hazing or bullying of members is unacceptable and will not be tolerated for any reason. All personnel should be able to work in an environment free of hazing and bullying. The department further does not tolerate work related pranks that violate a law or department rule, regulation or policy. Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to prohibit workplace and work related hazing and bullying. Workplace and work related hazing and bullying may cause the loss of trained and talented employees, reduce productivity and morale, and create unnecessary legal risks for the department. This policy also prohibits pranks that violate a law or department rule, regulation or policy. Definitions Bullying: Repetitive acts of aggressive behavior that intentionally threaten, humiliate, intimidate, degrade, or hurt, physically or mentally, another person. Bullying usually involves repeated acts committed by a person or group who has, or is perceived as having, more power than the victim/target of the bullying.
    [Show full text]
  • Bullying and Harassment Are Difficult to Deal with What Is Harassment? and Sometimes Difficult to Resolve
    PSS information guide BULLYING AND HARRASSMENT 6 PSS: 020 7245 0412, [email protected] Bullying and harassment are difficult to deal with What is harassment? and sometimes difficult to resolve. Your workplace Harassment is any unwanted or unwelcome has policies that set standards of behaviour for behaviour that affects your dignity. From mild- all employees as part of promoting equality and ly unpleasant comments to physical violence, it diversity in service delivery and employment. is often about a personal characteristic such as age, gender, race, sexual orientation, disability, religion or nationality. It can be persistent or a You have the right to work without discrimina- one-off incident. tion and with respect. Someone who believes they are being harassed will view the actions or comments of someone else as demeaning What is bullying? or unacceptable. People have different tolerance levels, so what one person views as demeaning may not appear as Bullying at work is an abuse of power or position. such to someone else. It is offensive discrimination through persistent, vindictive, cruel or humiliating attempts to under- If you think you are experiencing bullying or mine, criticise, condemn, hurt or humiliate either an individual or a group of employees. Examples harassment: of bullying and harassing behaviour include: Think about whether you need time to adjust to new management/organisational style. X constantly criticising a competent worker Check your organisation’s professional conduct X undermining the position, status, worth, value policies. or potential of workers Discuss your concerns with your line manager, HR, X misusing power or position union representative or colleagues who might share X making unfounded comments/threats about job your concerns.
    [Show full text]
  • Types of Bullying in the Senior High Schools in Ghana
    Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol.7, No.36, 2016 Types of Bullying in the Senior High Schhools in Ghana Kwasi Otopa Antiri Department Of Guidance And Counselling, University Of Cape Coast. Cape Coast, Ghana Abstract The main objective of the study was to examine the types of bullying that were taking place in the senior high schools in Ghana. A multi-stage sampling procedure, comprising purposive, simple random and snowball sampling technique, was used in the selection of the sample. A total of 354 respondents were drawn six schools in Ashanti, Central and Northern Regions. The interview schedule was administered to three categories of respondents, these were bullies, victims of bullies and bystanders in bullying. The various types of bullying which were going on in the schools were; physical, social, verbal, cyber and psychological. Accordingly the study revealed that physical and verbal bullying were rampant in the various schools in the country. The study recommends the need for the schools to set up a system which will identify the various types and also stop the bullying in the schools. Students should be counselled and made aware of the harmful effects of bullying in the schools. Keywords: Bullies, Victims, Bystanders, Physical, Social, Verbal, Cyber and Psychological. BACKGROUND One major phenomenon that is responsible for the setback in the development of human society is child abuse, specifically bullying. This global phenomenon, has, over the years, attracted the attention of governmental and non-governmental organisations all over the world (Farmer, 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • Bullying and Harassment - What's the Difference? Bullying and Harassment - What's the Difference?
    Leadership & Strategy » HR for Leaders » Bullying » Bullying and Harassment - What's the Difference? Bullying and Harassment - What's the Difference? Bullying and harassment are terms that are used interchangeably by organisations, with bullying often regarded as a type of harassment. There are, however, some notable differences, which are particularly important to bear in mind if you are drawing up an anti-bullying policy. This article gives an overview of what these main differences are. Defining harassment Definitions of harassment tend to refer to behaviour which is offensive and intrusive, with a sexual, racial or physical element. ACAS defines harassment as: ‘Unwanted conduct that violates people’s dignity or creates an intimidating hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.’ [1] Harassment is covered in law by acts such as the Sex Discrimination Act, the Race Relations Act, the Disability Discrimination Act and the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act, as well as the laws of common assault. Defining bullying There are many ways to define bullying, with no single definition used across the board. ACAS, again, suggests the following: ‘Offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behaviour, an abuse or misuse of power through means intended to undermine, humiliate, denigrate or injure the recipient.’ The Andrea Adams Trust defined bullying as: [2] Unwarranted humiliating or offensive behaviour towards an individual or groups of employees. Persistently negative malicious attacks on personal or professional performance typically characterised as unpredictable, unfair, irrational and often unseen. An abuse of power or position that can cause such anxiety that people gradually lose all belief in themselves, suffering physical ill health and mental distress as a direct result.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Psychological Manipulation
    The Masks of Manipulation Trashy Tricks 5-Step Method to Stop Manipulation 10/11/18 Advancing School Mental Health Conference Defining psychological manipulation Social Emotional Learning & manipulation Presentation Requirements for successful manipulation Methods of manipulation Overview Measuring manipulative behavior Factor Analysis Conclusions 10/11/18 Advancing School Mental Health Conference Defining Psychological Manipulation 1. Wikipedia 2. SEL for Prevention 1. Psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims to change the behavior or perception of others through abusive, deceptive, or underhanded tactics. By advancing the interests of the manipulator, often at another's expense, such methods could be considered exploitative, abusive, devious, and deceptive. 2. SEL for Prevention defines manipulation as the behavior an individual employs to get their own way! 10/11/18 Advancing School Mental Health Conference Relational abuse Bullying (cyber) Mind games The Problem with Gas-lighting Manipulation Peer Pressure Damages relationships Distrust 10/11/18 Advancing School Mental Health Conference When collaborating in the workforce, or in school, manipulation Manipulation crosses leads to less open emotional boundaries communication and in relationships. It cooperation, as well as involves coercion, other lower levels of deception, and breaking problem-solving and others’ trust (King, 2013). creativity (Cropanzano & Rupp, 2009; Krause, Why Teach 2004). Children about Manipulation? Peer pressure, Manipulation can relationship violence, become destructive in sexual molestation, relationships because it cyber-bullying are all creates an imbalance of negative manipulative power and a lack of trust. behaviors. 10/11/18 Advancing School Mental Health Conference Camp MakeBelieve Kids & Step Up Curriculum Each of the 8 Steps of the curricula builds knowledge, skills and strategies.
    [Show full text]